C. Yeah, I know. What did I say to make you think otherwise?
A & B. You (and the FSF) have a misconception on what freedom is. In order to encroach upon one's liberty, you must prevent that person from doing something. For example, telling someone that they cannot drink alcohol is encroaching upon their liberty. However, if you make titanium shovels that don't have a handle, and the end-user has no means to put a handle on it so they can hang it on a hook, you are not encroaching upon that end-user's freedom. They can make their own shovel out of wood and create a handle for that. Or they can buy a different shovel with a handle on it. What you are saying is that the maker of the shovel is encroaching upon the freedom of the user because the maker of the shovel is preventing the user from hanging the shovel on a hook. Not true. The shovel was created to aid the user in digging. End of story. If the user wants the shovel to do more, buy another shovel or make your own.
From the article:
When people talk about the "digital divide", they implicitly suppose that using computers is good and not having them is bad. But is it a good thing to give people computers with Windows or other proprietary software?
Stallman is saying that even though the above shovel is useful for digging, since it isn't made of a softer material so you can put a handle on it, you shouldn't give said shovel to those who would benefit from it. That's dangerous thinking, folks.
How does free software give the average user any more or less control over how their computer works? The average Joe doesn't have the expertise to change the source, nor does he have the cash to hire someone to change it for him. Even for those who do have the expertise and/or cash, if you don't like the way a particular proprietary software program works, make a new one that works the way you want it to. Sure, it's more difficult to do, but proprietary software in no way takes away the end-user's freedom.
I am in no way against free software. I am against calling proprietary software "subjugation, isolation and exploitation".
I think you missed the part where they spend way more than the democrats and ratchet up debt like nothing else on the planet...
I think you missed the part where I said "Republicans" not "George Bush".
(not republican, just wanted to point out what I see as a bit of a fallacy, that old "George Bush is a Republican so all Republicans are like George Bush" thing)
[they] just elected the Democrats, traditionally the more liberty friendly of their two parties
That depends on your definition of liberty. Do you mean "Give us all your money so we can spend it for you, but do as you wish (to an extent)" freedom (Democrats) or "Spend your money like you want but we'll lynch ya if you don't share our values" freedom (Republicans).
I, personally, think they are both a crock. I'm all for the "Spend your money how you want and do whatever you want as long as it's not hurting anybody else" kind of freedom (Libertarians).
So, basically, shovels are better than back hoes because with a shovel you can make both small and big holes, but with back-hoes, you can only make big holes. However, what you aren't taking into account is that while backhoes can't make small holes, they are way more efficient at making big ones.
And just for the record, a "small hole" is a low-level project, such as an operating system, and a "big hole" is a higher-level system, like a software program.
I'm not saying that C# is better than C, just that they have different purposes and are therefore better at different things.
From South Texas. I pay 20 cents/kWh for electricity. Unfortunately, there is no non-electricity version of air conditioning, so I cry myself to sleep at night (and yes, it's still fricken hot here).
If I were to write in John Smith, which of the 12,000 John Smith's would get my vote? It makes perfect sense when you realize that names are not unique.
Imagine? Are we talking about some random concoction in your head or the web browser I am current staring at? Web browsers are virtual planes. End of story. When the scrollX increases by 1, every pixel on my screen moves over to the left by 1. If it was a fixed window that changes, then every time the scrollX increased by 1, I would see an entirely new set of pixels, not the previous set translated to the left.
So, if leap seconds are needed to correct the position of the sun at noon, then that means that aren't exactly 24 hours/1440 minutes/86400 seconds in a day. Isn't the definition of 1 hour supposed to be 1/24th of a day? The length of a second is completely arbitrary. It is 1/60th of 1/60th of 1/24th of a day. So why not just make an hour slightly shorter (or longer, whichever the case) to be exactly 1/24th of a day.
Leap years, on the other hand, are completely justified. 1 year is defined as one trip around the sun. 1 day is defined as one rotation of the earth around its own axis. It just so happens that there are 365.24ish days in 1 year.
The implications of changing the definition of the hour would be completely technical, as is the case with the leap second. No one would notice their clock being a few seconds off.
Or, if you RTFA, you realize that the lack of sunspots causes global cooling.
From TFA:
In the past 1000 years, three previous such events -- the Dalton, Maunder, and SpÃrer Minimums, have all led to rapid cooling. One was large enough to be called a "mini ice age".
States don't build their own highway system? Then what the hell does the DOT do? Man, we need to fire those guys...
But seriously, did you really think that the federal government builds all the highways in the country? 'Cause they don't. They give money to the states to build and maintain Interstate Highways, but each state has it's own highway system. For example, I hate driving into Oklahoma from Texas, because Texas actually spends money to maintain their highways and Oklahoma has shitty, shitty, shitty highways.
It is not a stereotype to say that many burglaries are committed by blacks, as this can easily be backed by data. It is stereotypical, however, to say, "All blacks commit burglaries", "Most blacks commit burglaries", or "He is black so he's probably committed burglary."
Slashdot Mirror
C. Yeah, I know. What did I say to make you think otherwise?
A & B. You (and the FSF) have a misconception on what freedom is. In order to encroach upon one's liberty, you must prevent that person from doing something. For example, telling someone that they cannot drink alcohol is encroaching upon their liberty. However, if you make titanium shovels that don't have a handle, and the end-user has no means to put a handle on it so they can hang it on a hook, you are not encroaching upon that end-user's freedom. They can make their own shovel out of wood and create a handle for that. Or they can buy a different shovel with a handle on it. What you are saying is that the maker of the shovel is encroaching upon the freedom of the user because the maker of the shovel is preventing the user from hanging the shovel on a hook. Not true. The shovel was created to aid the user in digging. End of story. If the user wants the shovel to do more, buy another shovel or make your own.
From the article:
When people talk about the "digital divide", they implicitly suppose that using computers is good and not having them is bad. But is it a good thing to give people computers with Windows or other proprietary software?
Stallman is saying that even though the above shovel is useful for digging, since it isn't made of a softer material so you can put a handle on it, you shouldn't give said shovel to those who would benefit from it. That's dangerous thinking, folks.
How does free software give the average user any more or less control over how their computer works? The average Joe doesn't have the expertise to change the source, nor does he have the cash to hire someone to change it for him. Even for those who do have the expertise and/or cash, if you don't like the way a particular proprietary software program works, make a new one that works the way you want it to. Sure, it's more difficult to do, but proprietary software in no way takes away the end-user's freedom.
I am in no way against free software. I am against calling proprietary software "subjugation, isolation and exploitation".
I think you missed the part where they spend way more than the democrats and ratchet up debt like nothing else on the planet...
I think you missed the part where I said "Republicans" not "George Bush".
(not republican, just wanted to point out what I see as a bit of a fallacy, that old "George Bush is a Republican so all Republicans are like George Bush" thing)
[they] just elected the Democrats, traditionally the more liberty friendly of their two parties
That depends on your definition of liberty. Do you mean "Give us all your money so we can spend it for you, but do as you wish (to an extent)" freedom (Democrats) or "Spend your money like you want but we'll lynch ya if you don't share our values" freedom (Republicans).
I, personally, think they are both a crock. I'm all for the "Spend your money how you want and do whatever you want as long as it's not hurting anybody else" kind of freedom (Libertarians).
So, basically, shovels are better than back hoes because with a shovel you can make both small and big holes, but with back-hoes, you can only make big holes. However, what you aren't taking into account is that while backhoes can't make small holes, they are way more efficient at making big ones.
And just for the record, a "small hole" is a low-level project, such as an operating system, and a "big hole" is a higher-level system, like a software program.
I'm not saying that C# is better than C, just that they have different purposes and are therefore better at different things.
And with a netbook you can't sit in the park with the sun at your back and still see the screen.
"You ain't sly are ya? 'Cause I got my boys..."
From South Texas. I pay 20 cents/kWh for electricity. Unfortunately, there is no non-electricity version of air conditioning, so I cry myself to sleep at night (and yes, it's still fricken hot here).
google it
Yeah, but it is a bloated, bureaucratic lap dog.
If I were to write in John Smith, which of the 12,000 John Smith's would get my vote? It makes perfect sense when you realize that names are not unique.
Imagine? Are we talking about some random concoction in your head or the web browser I am current staring at? Web browsers are virtual planes. End of story. When the scrollX increases by 1, every pixel on my screen moves over to the left by 1. If it was a fixed window that changes, then every time the scrollX increased by 1, I would see an entirely new set of pixels, not the previous set translated to the left.
However, since screenX + scrollX is always equal to documentX, they are simply vectors of the same dimension, not separate dimensions.
so if you're a journalist going to report on it
Who's a journalist?
Example?
Got an example?
Uh oh... Here comes PETA...
So, if leap seconds are needed to correct the position of the sun at noon, then that means that aren't exactly 24 hours/1440 minutes/86400 seconds in a day. Isn't the definition of 1 hour supposed to be 1/24th of a day? The length of a second is completely arbitrary. It is 1/60th of 1/60th of 1/24th of a day. So why not just make an hour slightly shorter (or longer, whichever the case) to be exactly 1/24th of a day.
Leap years, on the other hand, are completely justified. 1 year is defined as one trip around the sun. 1 day is defined as one rotation of the earth around its own axis. It just so happens that there are 365.24ish days in 1 year.
The implications of changing the definition of the hour would be completely technical, as is the case with the leap second. No one would notice their clock being a few seconds off.
No, but this might:
http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+History+First+Spotless+Month+in+a+Century/article12823.htm
Ouch... double whammy...
Or, if you RTFA, you realize that the lack of sunspots causes global cooling.
From TFA:
In the past 1000 years, three previous such events -- the Dalton, Maunder, and SpÃrer Minimums, have all led to rapid cooling. One was large enough to be called a "mini ice age".
the Democrats are a classically conservative party
The key word here is classically. That means that traditionally (i.e. in the past, not now) they were conservative.
States don't build their own highway system? Then what the hell does the DOT do? Man, we need to fire those guys...
But seriously, did you really think that the federal government builds all the highways in the country? 'Cause they don't. They give money to the states to build and maintain Interstate Highways, but each state has it's own highway system. For example, I hate driving into Oklahoma from Texas, because Texas actually spends money to maintain their highways and Oklahoma has shitty, shitty, shitty highways.
It is not a stereotype to say that many burglaries are committed by blacks, as this can easily be backed by data. It is stereotypical, however, to say, "All blacks commit burglaries", "Most blacks commit burglaries", or "He is black so he's probably committed burglary."
mmmmmm... granola